Is there a definitive explanation of how it was faked by the people who made it? Like I said before, I can imagine that the part where the kid is actually in the air is faked either with a prop or maybe even with some post processing, but I'd have a hard time believing that the eagle wasn't really there grabbing at something.

Is there a definitive explanation of how it was faked by the people who made it? Like I said before, I can imagine that the part where the kid is actually in the air is faked either with a prop or maybe even with some post processing, but I'd have a hard time believing that the eagle wasn't really there grabbing at something.

If it is all composited by computer I'd be extremely impressed.

Yes, there was one link provided in the "case closed" post.

It was done as an academic project. I don't believe the students at at the art school ever purported it to be real. It was tweeted and retweeted and spread virally (including here), but I don't think anyone involved claimed it to be true.

Is there a definitive explanation of how it was faked by the people who made it? Like I said before, I can imagine that the part where the kid is actually in the air is faked either with a prop or maybe even with some post processing, but I'd have a hard time believing that the eagle wasn't really there grabbing at something.

If it is all composited by computer I'd be extremely impressed.

Yes, there was one link provided in the "case closed" post.

It was done as an academic project. I don't believe the students at at the art school ever purported it to be real. It was tweeted and retweeted and spread virally (including here), but I don't think anyone involved claimed it to be true.

A Montreal animation school has fessed up that the "Golden Eagle Snatches Kid" on YouTube is a fake, created by three students in its three-year animation and digital design degree program."Both the eagle and the kid were created in 3D animation and integrated in to the film afterwards," the school, Centre NAD, said in a statement Wednesday.

I totally believed it at first, but when brx posted the 'fake expose' video, I figured it was fake, the movement of the child after the eagle loses hold is wrong, as noted in that video. The trajectory is odd, and there is no apparent weight to the child or parts of the child, it acts as a rigid body, it doesn't slump or sag or twist as though the eagle let go with one claw and then the other. It moves at an upward angle too far before it's trajectory turns down. I'm sure it could be picked to pieces with further analysis.

A Montreal animation school has fessed up that the "Golden Eagle Snatches Kid" on YouTube is a fake, created by three students in its three-year animation and digital design degree program."Both the eagle and the kid were created in 3D animation and integrated in to the film afterwards," the school, Centre NAD, said in a statement Wednesday.

All the above said, it should be noted some eagles can carry an average-weight toddler like this one, and even if they can't, they certainly have enough momentum to carry them up to lethal heights. So while this is a decent fake, it is still something to watch out for.

The slowsort algorithm is a perfect illustration of the multiply and surrender paradigm, which is perhaps the single most important paradigm in the development of reluctant algorithms. The basic multiply and surrender strategy consists in replacing the problem at hand by two or more subproblems, each slightly simpler than the original, and continue multiplying subproblems and subsubproblems recursively in this fashion as long as possible. At some point the subproblems will all become so simple that their solution can no longer be postponed, and we will have to surrender. Experience shows that, in most cases, by the time this point is reached the total work will be substantially higher than what could have been wasted by a more direct approach.

Maybe I should have been clearer. I didn't mean any comment here, arguing that it might happen.
All comments here are perfectly reasonable.
There was at least one poster in the comments section of the news article who seemed to still believe the youtube clip is real.

That one's more obviously fake and the animation is infinitely less organic, but honestly it's still very good at least for the first 13 seconds; seeing the texture up close and in direct sunlight pretty much kills it though.